Proofs of Migration by way of the African Highlands.—It is owing to this twofold current of vegetation flowing into Australia by widely different routes that we have in this distant land a better representation of the European flora, both as regards species and genera, than in any other part of the southern hemisphere; and, so far as I can judge of the facts, there is no general phenomenon—that is, nothing in the distribution of genera and other groups of plants as opposed to cases of individual species—that is not fairly accounted for by such an origin. It further receives support from the case of South Africa, which also contains a large and important representation of the northern flora. But here we see no indications (or very slight ones) of that southern influx which has given Australia such a community of vegetation with the Antarctic lands. There are no less than sixty genera of strictly north temperate plants in South Africa, none of which occur in Australia; while very few of the species, so characteristic of Australia, New Zealand, and Fuegia, are found there. It
is clear, therefore, that South Africa has received its European plants by the direct route through the Abyssinian highlands and the lofty equatorial mountains, and mostly at a distant period when the conditions for migration were somewhat more favourable than they are now. The much greater directness of the route from Northern Europe to South Africa than to Australia; and the existence even now of lofty mountains and extensive highlands for a large portion of the distance, will explain (what Sir Joseph Hooker notes as "a very curious fact") why South Africa has more very northern European genera than Australia, while Australia has more identical species and a better representation on the whole of the European flora—this being clearly due to the large influx of species it has received from the Antarctic Islands, in addition to those which have entered it by way of Asia. The greater distance of South Africa even now from any of these islands, and the much deeper sea to the south of the African continent, than in the case of Tasmania and New Zealand, indicating a smaller recent extension southward, is all quite in harmony with the facts of distribution of the northern flora above referred to.
Supposed Connection of South Africa and Australia.—There remains, however, the small amount of direct affinity between the vegetation of South Africa and that of Australia, New Zealand, and Temperate South America, consisting in all of fifteen genera, five of which are confined to Australia and South Africa, while several natural orders are better represented in these two countries than in any other part of the world. This resemblance has been supposed to imply some former land-connection of all the great southern lands, but it appears to me that any such supposition is wholly unnecessary. The differences between the faunas and floras of these countries are too great and too radical to render it possible that any such connection should have existed except at a very remote period. But if we have to go back so far for an explanation, a much simpler one presents itself, and one more in accordance with what we have learnt of the general permanence of deep oceans and the great changes that have taken place
in the distribution of all forms of life. Just as we explain the presence of marsupials in Australia and America and of Centetidæ in Madagascar and the Antilles, by the preservation in these localities of remnants of once wide-spread types, so we should prefer to consider the few genera common to Australia and South Africa as remnants of an ancient vegetation, once spread over the northern hemisphere, driven southward by the pressure of more specialised types, and now finding a refuge in these two widely separated southern lands. It is suggestive of such an explanation that these genera are either of very ancient groups—as Conifers and Cycads—or plants of low organisation as the Restiaceæ—or of world-wide distribution, as Melanthaceæ.
The Endemic Genera of Plants in New Zealand.—Returning now to the New Zealand flora, with which we are more especially concerned, there only remains to be considered the peculiar or endemic genera which characterise it. These are thirty-two in number, and are mostly very isolated. A few have affinities with Arctic groups, others with Himalayan, or Australian genera; several are tropical forms, but the majority appear to be altogether peculiar types of world-wide groups—as Leguminosæ, Saxifrageæ, Compositæ, Orchideæ, &c. We must evidently trace back these peculiar forms to the earliest immigrants, either from the north or from the south; and the great antiquity we are obliged to give to New Zealand—an antiquity supported by every feature in its fauna and flora, no less than by its geological structure, and its extinct forms of life[[195]]—affords ample time for the changes in the general distribution of plants, and for those due to isolation and modification under
the influence of changed conditions, which are manifested by the extreme peculiarity of many of these interesting endemic forms.
The Absence of Southern Types from the Northern Hemisphere.—We have now only to notice the singular want of reciprocity in the migrations of northern and southern types of vegetation. In return for the vast number of European plants which have reached Australia, not one single Australian plant has entered any part of the north temperate zone, and the same may be said of the typical southern vegetation in general, whether developed in the Antarctic lands, New Zealand, South America, or South Africa. The furthest northern outliers of the southern flora are a few genera of Antarctic type on the Bornean Alps; the genus Acæna which has a species in California; two representatives of the Australian flora—Casuarina and Stylidium, in the peninsula of India; while China and the Philippines have two strictly Australian genera of Orchideæ—Microtis and Thelymitra, as well as a Restiaceous genus. Several distinct causes appear to have combined to produce this curious inability of the southern flora to make its way into the northern hemisphere. The primary cause is, no doubt, the totally different distribution of land in the two hemispheres, so that in the south there is the minimum of land in the colder parts of the temperate zone and in the north the maximum. This is well shown by the fact that on the parallel of Lat. 50° N. we pass over 240° of land or shallow sea, while on the same parallel of south latitude we have only 4°, where we cross the southern part of Patagonia. Again the three most important south temperate land-areas—South Temperate America, South Africa, and Australia—are widely separated from each other, and have in all probability always been so; whereas the whole of the north temperate lands are practically continuous. It follows that, instead of the enormous northern area, in which highly organised and dominant groups of plants have been developed gifted with great colonising and aggressive powers, we have in the south three comparatively small and detached areas, in which rich floras have been developed with special
adaptations to soil, climate, and organic environment, but comparatively impotent and inferior beyond their own domain.
Another circumstance which makes the contest between the northern and southern forms still more unequal, is the much greater hardiness of the former, from having been developed in a colder region, and one where alpine and arctic conditions extensively prevail; whereas the southern floras have been mainly developed in mild regions to which they have been altogether confined. While the northern plants have been driven north or south by each succeeding change of climate, the southern species have undergone comparatively slight changes of this nature, owing to the areas they occupy being unconnected with the ice-bearing Antarctic continent. It follows, that whereas the northern plants find in all these southern lands a milder and more equable climate than that to which they have been accustomed, and are thus often able to grow and flourish even more vigorously than in their native land, the southern plants would find in almost every part of Europe, North America or Northern Asia, a more severe and less equable climate, with winters that usually prove fatal to them even under cultivation. These causes, taken separately, are very powerful, but when combined they must, I think, be held to be amply sufficient to explain why examples of the typical southern vegetation are almost unknown in the north temperate zone, while a very few of them have extended so far as the northern tropic.[[196]]